Wikitroid talk:Requests for Comment/Reverting
1RR 3RR zzzzz. What if there are more than 3 bad edits? 1RV, while not perfect, is a better policy to implement to prevent edit warring. DoctorPain99 {ROLLBACKER} (talk • • • • ) 04:47, January 26, 2012 (UTC) Comment I'm just going to make this clear to people who may be confused. 1 revert rule does not mean that you will be banned if you revert a revert just once by accident. Users will be warned several times before they get blocked for violating this rule. Mr. Anon 04:57, January 26, 2012 (UTC) *'Comment' That wasn't the imperfection I was referring to (and that may not be what you're referring to), but that is a good point to add. DoctorPain99 {ROLLBACKER} (talk • • • • ) 05:01, January 26, 2012 (UTC) **'Comment' I was not replying to you. Rather, I was clearing up a possible misconception that might arise, since the userbase of this wiki is familiar with the 3 revert rule, where users can be blocked after only one violation. Mr. Anon 01:24, January 27, 2012 (UTC) Question: Shouldn't it be up to an administrator what counts as edit warring and what doesn't? I can imagine a scenario where two users disagree on something, yet after several edits find something they can both agree on; however, if a strict rule regarding a number of reverts were in place, they would have to be punished for an already resolved situation. Shotrocket6 10:50, January 26, 2012 (UTC) :*Shotrocket, if there is a dispute regarding an article, it should immediately be brought to the talk page. Edit warring refers to any time two users revert each other several times without bringing it to a talk page. Mr. Anon 01:24, January 27, 2012 (UTC) ::*I do know what an edit war is, but thank you. I was referring to the fact that if an edit war does take place and it is not discussed by the users involved on the articles talk page, but rather via edit summaries or on their talk pages, it may not be appropriate to block them when the situation has already been resolved. Shotrocket6 07:56, January 29, 2012 (UTC) :::*I'm not sure what kind of situation you are refering to. If the dispute is settled on the users' talk pages, that's fine. It would be prefered not to have the dispute settled in edit comments. If the edit summary of the second revert (User A reverting User B after User B has reverted User A) seems to settle it, and the issue is minor enough, the users won't necessarily be warned. But for major disputes, especially ones that involve three or more users, should always be brought up on the article's talk page and should not be settled through edit summaries. Mr. Anon 01:57, February 3, 2012 (UTC) ::::*On that I agree. Shotrocket6 12:09, February 4, 2012 (UTC) *'Comment': I've edited Wikis for a long time now and have seen many times where user(s) will not compromise and will keep making their edit despite being reverted. It happened today on SmashWiki. 1RV is a good rule of thumb that we could link to as a warning when users edit war. DoctorPain99 {ROLLBACKER} (talk • • • • ) 17:39, January 26, 2012 (UTC) *'Comment' Neutral. I honestly don't see enough edit wars on wikitroid in the first place to really see if it would affect it or not. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/ } 20:55, January 26, 2012 (UTC) *'Comment' - You guys go with whatever you think best. Edit wars will undoubtedly go on until someone stops it, which may be 10 or more reverts. Only admins can lock the pages to stop and prevent the wars, and they may not get there in time. Plus, if someone really believes they are right as much as the other person, they will do their best to get their information up on that page. No matter which limit you use, it will surely be exceeded anyway. Also, as already stated, we just don't get that many wars around here. There's really no need to concern ourselves with this subject. The penalty is probably more important, and that's already been established. The Exterminator {ADMIN} (talk • • ) 03:49, February 12, 2012 (UTC) *'1RR' As the first agree voter on this and as creator of the policy proposal added today to this RfC. You are welcome to suggest changes. --[[User:RoyboyX|'R'o'y'b'o'y'X']](complaints/ ) 01:21, May 31, 2013 (UTC) *'Agree' A little skeptical of how well this will actually work, but I guess it wouldn't hurt. Fang³ (talk) 00:22, June 1, 2013 (UTC) **What part are you skeptical about? DoctorPain99 02:52, June 1, 2013 (UTC) *I reiterate my support for 1RR. Mr. Anon (talk) 15:40, June 8, 2013 (UTC) *'Oppose' The proposed policy does not currently mention anything about how this would be enforced, or any consequences for starting a revert war. In effect, all it does is make edit wars discouraged. TheMG {talk/ } 22:57, June 16, 2013 (UTC) :*Yes, and now the standard block penalties have been added. --[[User:RoyboyX|'R'o'y'b'o'y'X']](complaints/ ) 01:24, June 20, 2013 (UTC) ::*'Comment:' Revert war in that section is not well defined. It also does not take into consideration if more than two users are engaged in a revert war. What if one user reverts, then tries to take it to the talk page, then two other users edit war regardless? That was part of the reason people proposed 1RR, correct? TheMG {talk/ } 16:00, June 22, 2013 (UTC) :::*English, please? --[[User:RoyboyX|'R'o'y'b'o'y'X']](complaints/ ) 16:03, June 22, 2013 (UTC) ::::*Actually, now I see what you mean. If two users other than the original warrers edit war? That's not likely. --[[User:RoyboyX|'R'o'y'b'o'y'X']](complaints/ ) 16:04, June 22, 2013 (UTC) *'Support' Now that the policy can be enforced, I will support. TheMG {talk/ } 23:00, June 22, 2013 (UTC)